ATTACHMENT A - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) - 2 DEC 2020.docx

DOCX document 119 KB Posted

Attached to
Quality Assurance (QA) Seeding Solicitation Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number
W912DY20R0028
Issued by
Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Engineering Support Center Huntsville

About this file

This past performance questionnaire is used to evaluate contractors for a quality assurance seeding multiple award task order contract to be awarded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineering Support Center Huntsville. The $49 million ceiling, firm-fixed price MATOC will have an average task order value of $500,000 and support sites throughout the United States, territories, and outlying areas. It has a North American Industry Classification System code of 562910 for environmental remediation services and a small business size standard of 750 employees. The Product Service Code is F108 for hazardous substance removal, cleanup, and disposal services. Completed questionnaires are to be submitted by clients directly to the Corps by the solicitation closing date of December 2, 2020 and will be used to assess quality of work, cost controls, timeliness, management effectiveness, customer satisfaction, and overall past performance on relevant contracts.

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to Quality Assurance (QA) Seeding Solicitation, newest first.
File Type Posted
ATTACHMENT O - Technical Experience Reference - 5 JAN 2020.doc DOC document
ATTACHMENT P - QA PROJNET - 25 JAN 2021.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
I.B.08 W912DY20R0028 Amendment 02 - 25 JAN 2021 (CONFIRMED COPY).pdf PDF
I.B.08 W912DY20R0028 Amendment 02 - 25 JAN 2021 (MOD COPY).pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT I - Sample Task Order Worksheet - 22 Jan 2021.xls XLS spreadsheet
ATTACHMENT H - MATOC Price Proposal Worksheet -5 JAN 2021.xls XLS spreadsheet
ATTACHMENT C - PWS for Sample Task Order 22 January 2021.pdf PDF
I.B.08 W912DY20R0028 Amendment 01 - 12 Jan 2021 (MOD COPY).pdf PDF
I.B.08 W912DY20R0028 Amendment 01 - 12 Jan 2021 (CONFORM COPY).pdf PDF
I.B.08 QA SEEDING RFP - FINAL - 16 DEC 2020.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT F - Small Business Participation Plan - 16 DEC 2020.docx DOCX document
ATTACHMENT I - Sample Task Order Worksheet - 1 DEC 2020.xls XLS spreadsheet
ATTACHMENT E - Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan - 1 DEC 2020.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT G - Key Personnel and Key Subcontractors List - 2 DEC 2020.doc DOC document
ATTACHMENT O - Experience Past Performance Reference - 2 DEC 2020.doc DOC document
ATTACHMENT B - Performance Requirements Summary - 2 DEC 2020.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT H - MATOC Price Proposal Worksheet -1 DEC 2020.xls XLS spreadsheet
ATTACHMENT K - Letter of Commitment for Key Subcontractor Sample - 2 DEC 2020.docx DOCX document
ATTACHMENT M - Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) - 14 SEPT 2020.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT N - Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs) - 2 DEC 2020.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT C -PWS for Sample Task Order - 23 NOV 2020.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT D - Key Personnel Resume Format - 2 DEC 2020.doc DOC document
ATTACHMENT L - Sample Task Order Wage Determination - 2 DEC 2020.pdf PDF
ATTACHMENT J - Letter of Commitment for Key Personnel Sample - 2 DEC 2020.docx DOCX document
Show all 24

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

Completed PPQs should be submitted directly from the client to U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville at mailbox: CEHNC-QASEED@usace.army.mil prior to the solicitation closing date. Rows can be expanded to add information; otherwise do not alter this form. No hand-written responses.

Client: The organization that work was completed at Offeror: The organization that completed the work (Organization proposing on requirement)

SECTION A: Offeror’s Information This section is to be completed by the Offeror prior to sending to Client for completion.

Solicitation Number
W912DY20R0028

Solicitation Closing Date

Your Organization’s Name

Point of Contact Name

Address

Email Address

Telephone Number

Performance as Sub or Prime

Length of Involvement in Contract

Date Sent to Client

Name of Person Sent To

SECTION B: Project Information This section to be completed by the Client ONLY.

Name of Person Completing Form

Title

Telephone Number

Contract Title

Contract Number

Project Description

Contract Type/Cost

Award Date

Original Contract Price

Final Contract Price

Explain Difference from Original Contract Price and Final Contract Price

Percentage of Work Performed by Contractor

Roles and Responsibilities as Sub or Prime

Expected Completion Date

Actual Completion Date

Explain Differences From Expected and Actual Completion Dates

1. Quality of Work:

a) How was the contractor’s compliance with applicable safety standards to protect personnel and company/agency resources?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

b) How was the contractor’s compliance with applicable labor standards?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

c) Was the contractor’s effort in Quality Control successful in ensuring quality workmanship on your project?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

d) Was the contractor committed to customer satisfaction?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

e) Overall rating for Quality of Work Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

2. Cost Controls:

a) Did the Contractor perform the required services at the contract price without adverse effect on performance?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

b) Did the contractor submit a fair and reasonable proposal when requested to perform additional work?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

c) If this contract is an indefinite delivery type contract (e.g., Multiple Award Environmental Contract, Task Order Contract, etc.), has the Contractor submitted competitive quotes on the individual orders issued under this contract?

Yes No N/A

d) Overall rating for Cost Controls Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

3. Timeliness of Performance:

a) Was the contractor timely in submitting schedules, reports, billings and other contract submittals?

Always Usually Sometimes Never N/A

b) Was the contractor timely in responding to requests for proposals for additional work?

Always Usually Sometimes Never N/A

c) Did the contractor complete the contract on time taking into account all excusable delays?

Yes No N/A

d) Was the contractor assessed any liquidated damages or deductions for late or nonperformance of required work? If yes, please explain.

Yes No

e) Did the contractor exceed contractual requirements in relation to Timeliness of Performance in a way that was deemed beneficial to your agency?

Yes No N/A

If you answered No, indicate your reason by checking one of the following: Contractor met the requirements, but did not exceed them Did not meet some of the requirements Did not meet requirements and recovery is not likely

f) Overall rating for Timeliness of Performance Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

4. Effectiveness of Management:

a) Did the contractor award subcontracts in a timely manner and properly manage them?

Always Usually Sometimes Never N/A

b) If applicable, did the contractor meet its small, small disadvantaged and women-owned business participation goals?

Yes No N/A

c) How would you rate the management of this firm as it relates to the completion of your contract and to the qualifications of its on-site personnel. Please explain.

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent

d) Describe the performance of the following personnel (if applicable)

1. Program Manger
U
M
S
VG
E
2. Project Manager
U
M
S
VG
E
3. Engineering/Technical
U
M
S
VG
E
4. Quality Control Manager
U
M
S
VG
E
5. Safety Officer
U
M
S
VG
E
6. Superintendent
U
M
S
VG
E

5. Customer Satisfaction:

a) Did the Contractor show reasonable and cooperative behavior and attention to customer satisfaction? Yes No N/A If you answered NO, please explain why:

6. Overall Rating of Contractor:

In summary, which of the following would you choose to best describe the overall quality of this firm’s past performance?

Unsatisfactory Marginal Satisfactory Very Good Excellent The information in this Questionnaire may be verified by Personnel from the U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .